Nothing to be confused about, allow me to clarify. The resolution passed by the Collegium clearly states "average net professional income of Rs. 709.69 lakhs for the last five years....". Please specifically note the usage of the word "average" here. Therefore, the last 5 years have essentially been the sample size, and after deducting all expenses, he has on average made Rs. 7.09 crores per year. This is a fact, and cannot be disputed.

In fact, since this Rs. 7.09 crores per year is based on an average across 5 years, in all likelihood he has actually made north of Rs. 7.09 crores these last couple of years at least.

Im in my first year at an NLU. I got royally screwed over by my teammates in my uni internal moot rounds. As a result I had to drop out last minute and couldnt participate even though I'd done my research. Now i see everyone around me so into moots and I feel so sad. I really want to do moots, and good ones too!! Maybe get a fighting chance at the really nice international ones. But i feel like since I didnt start in 1st year, my chances are way lesser than anyone else to ever get selected for the great moots. If there's anyone here who started mooting in their 2nd year and still was able to develop their skills in mooting and achieve as a mooter, do let me know. Thank you

This is BIG because Sibal is President of the SCBA and one of the top 5 senior counsels, so his word counts for a law lot. Not to mention former Law Minster and very likely again Law Minister or AG, as INDIA Alliance are arguably favourites to win in 2029.

Only Pratibha Singh and Shwetasree Majumder are women judges from law firms AFAIK, but Shwetasree is really symbolic of the NLU generation. Will there be more like her? CAM, SAM, AZB etc partners???

https://www.barandbench.com/news/kapil-sibal-urges-collegium-appoint-women-lawyers-law-firms-judges

https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/sibal-urges-cji-chandrachud-to-appoint-more-women-in-higher-judiciary-124083001181_1.html

1. They're smarter than Gen X/Gen Y because of more access to information (Agree/Disagree)

2. They're more liberal and tolerant than Gen X/Gen Y because the world has evolved (Agree/Disagree)

3. They're more focused and hard working than Gen X/Gen Y because of more competition and career awareness (Agree/Disagree)

4. They're more fashionable than Gen X/Gen Y because of social media awareness (Agree/Disagree)

5. They're just the same as Gen X/Gen Y in every way (Agree/Disagree)

Request law profs to take this poll only!

Totally confused. Someone says 7cr is total net for last 5 years (so average net of 1.48 per year) and someone else says it is average net for last 5 years (so total net of 35 cr). Bit of a spread in those two positions! I suppose the truth, as always, is somewhere in between?

Hi guys, so I have family in the US who can sponsor work visas for me well as many times as I want until it gets accepted, I just wanted to know if there are any LLM's which you can get 100% scholarship with good grades from a decent university.

idm a LLM from a lower rank University in the US as well but it needs to be fully funded scholarship, do smaller UNI's provide that as My grades and CV will not get me that in the top Uni's and I cannot afford the high fee.

I graduated from a private university and gave 2 years for my UPSC prep, this year i missed the prelim cutoff. Now, I'm looking to start my career in corporate law. Which one of the tier 2/3 firms will be better for applying and which would actually give me a chance.

Please do help me out.

Hey,

I'm a T-3 NLU student and I was doing fine up until recently. I'm a first-gen with no contacts, and I'm having a career scare. I've completed an internship at a T-1 law firm and it didn't go well and sort of stunted my confidence. Prior to this, I was doing well at my T-2 internships, extra-curriculars and even academically. However since the internship, nothing has gone right. I've been rejected from all the internships I've applied to, and it's naturally disheartening. I also feel like I've hit a slump academically and I'm unable to study because I'm worried about my career.

I'm a 4th year student and it's getting real-er by the minute. I don't want to believe that I've squandered my "one opportunity" after the T-1, but it's slowly starting to feel like it.

What do I do? Where do I apply? Genuine suggestions for places to apply would be appreciated. Also any career guidance or aspect to focus on would be great.

Ik the post was made 6 months ago, but sharing this for anyone debating about this in the future.

Christ gives you an advantage of interning throughout the year and bagging something by yourself. Both have mixed crowds. While JGLS does have slightly better placements, you can’t depend on college placements in this field anymore. JGLS does have great faculty and if you can afford, it can be a close call between them. People do hate on Christ because of the crazy attendance requirements (75% strict). Otherwise, go for Christ, moot and intern throughout law school (or until a ppo comes through).

That's the point. Everyone here who is arguing that application based law can only be taught outside the university needs to understand that most of the courses in law can be taught in classroom blending and connecting theories with real life applications. That's what good teachers are supposed to do. It also gets students involved in the subjects more easily and helps them retain the understanding and knowledge.

Do a lot of moots and debates. Go for a lot of internships. Gain work experience and write research papers in the area of practice of your choice and otherwise.

Focus on your assignments in college, make them plag free and get them published.

These are the things that actually matter in the long run. Grades should be good, but making you a “batch topper” is only good for academics not your career.

Law is a field that requires you to be informative, agile and practical and yes very confident too. That’s how you’ll survive.

There’s a very simple and pragmatic reason why I don’t see Oxbridge and other top tier foreign universities opening campuses in India. As you will see from the articles below, there are demands for caste reservation in foreign universities. Way back in 2009, when the idea of foreign university campuses was first mooted, then Education minister Kapil Sibal said that there must be such reservation.

https://www.cnbctv18.com/education/ugc-rules-on-foreign-university-campuses-in-india-raise-more-questions-than-answers-15612201.htm/amp

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/quota-in-foreign-universities-too/articleshow/4782584.cms

Currently, Rahul Gandhi’s aggressive and opportunistic rhetoric on caste reservation could subsequently lead to demands for 50% reservation in foreign university campuses. Targeting low-profile universities like Southampton might not bring much mileage to the opposition , but targeting a high-profile university like Oxbridge certainly will. Thus, top foreign universities will wisely keep away and the dream of being taught by professors at these universities will only be fulfilled for rich, elite Indians who go abroad and study at the parents campuses (like Sibal and RaGa).

Other people have spoken re. the difficulties of your argument around 'practical law'. Also, you should know that there is an argument to say that the NLS administration's views on some of these extracurricular activities aren't entirely wrong.

On negotiation competitions, I'd massively disagree with them. They can be dead useful.

However, regarding journals, this is a rediculous thing we have imported from American legal culture. Student law reviews aren't producing anything earth-shaking. You aren't, by submitting your work to them, going through the sort of peer review that you'd be going through if you were submitting to a Current Legal Problems, a Law Quarterly Review, a Cambridge Law Journal or an Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. You wouldn't be producing anything groundbreaking because... well... you are an undergraduate law student, and the overwhelming majority of undergraduate law students (in all countries) aren't the next Granville Austin, Sir Arthur Goodhart, A.V. Dicey or Sir Ivor Jennings. And you know what? It's not just your VC who believes this to be true. One of your most well-known alums, Tarunab Khaitan, has also criticized this business of student law journals heavily when interviewed by LAOT - look it up. His advice on what you could do instead would, in my view, be much more helpful, than if you ran after these things (after all, look where he is in his career right now!).

Excellent points, but also utterly impractical. How will this actually work?

Collegium: We would like Mr. Karia to practice for some time, and he can then become a judge after 3 years

Mr. Karia: Yes, cool. So I just go and get some clients of my own and start arguing as a senior?

Collegium: Yes, we were going to directly appoint you, but some guy on Legally India wrote this brilliant comment about how you should imbibe the ethos of the bar first.

Mr. Karia: Oh wow, what a comment. So I become a judge in 2027, right?

Collegium: Yeah, we will make a recommendation and the collegium in 2027 will decide.

Mr. Karia: So, the 2027 collegium will surely recommend me once I give it all up and start my practice, right?

Collegium: We cant formally put it in writing, of course, but it's a done deal.

Mr. Karia: OK, so I'm going on your word, right? I won't get screwed over?

Collegium: Our word is our bond. We will leave a note for the 2027 Collegium.

Mr. Karia: Wow, thank you. This is reassuring.

Collegium: lol

Mr. Karia: lol

They are not providing the existing course outlines for people to really understand how they may pitch in. On the contrary, they are asking people to upload modules which they will review and then decide where to fit it in. That's not something good academics or even professionals are going to be very enthusiastic about.

Quite honestly — good for AM. She deserved recognition beyond the Shroffs' behind-the-scenes stalwart, and this is well due. She may have been a tough boss at times, but she's also absolutely brilliant and pretty reasonable. Better than a lot of other names in the industry. Best wishes to her and congratulations!

Recording of call with customer care below. But the bigger question is this: apparently any state police can complain to Airtel/Jio and get a number blocked?? Under what law is this??

https://x.com/abhijitmajumder/status/1829529046126096864

It’s challenging, but we do have some advantages.

Firstly, the NLS brand is well-known as the best in India, so just sending an email from our official nls.ac.in IDs gives us a lot of gravitas, making it easier to secure internships, at least in corporate and litigation.

Secondly, PPOs aren’t as crucial for us, as NLS attracts a lot of firms on Day 0.

There is sometimes a “Remedies in Commercial Law” elective offered at NLS. I took that one. Incredible. Beautiful blend of theory and practice and actual application. Same prof taught Contracts core as well for one section in NLS last year. Heard great things about that course too. Some of these courses, if done well, can really kindle a love for the law…

Wow! I always thought he was an NLS / NLU grad. Does he come from an ordinary background or from privilege? I ask because it's well known that AMS never gave the same weight/ preference to non-NLU grads. Of course, litigation could've been an exception. Barriers to entry perhaps may have been higher in more technical practice areas..

Well, it’s a good question, and it really cuts to the heart of what it means to take on the role of a judge—a role that’s fundamentally about responsibility, not just knowledge. You see, there’s a crucial distinction between knowing the law in theory and living it out in the crucible of real-world practice. When you serve as counsel, particularly as senior counsel, you’re immersed in the practical realities of the courtroom. You’re on the front lines, so to speak, engaging directly with the complexities of human conflict as it plays out under the law.

Now, why does that matter? Because the courtroom isn’t just a place where abstract legal principles are debated; it’s where those principles are tested, where they collide with the messy, unpredictable realities of life. When someone has that experience—when they’ve been through the rigors of counsel work—they gain a kind of wisdom that simply can’t be acquired in any other way. They learn to see the law not just as a set of rules, but as a living, breathing organism that interacts with human nature in all its forms.

And let’s be clear: the transition from counsel to judge is not a trivial one. A judge isn’t there to argue a case; they’re there to adjudicate it. That requires a deep understanding of what it means to be an advocate, because only then can they truly be impartial. If you skip that step, you risk placing someone on the bench who might still think like an advocate—someone who hasn’t fully internalized the impartiality that is so crucial to the role of a judge.

But beyond that, there’s also the matter of public trust. The judiciary must be seen as fair and impartial, and that perception is built on the integrity and experience of those who serve as judges. When a judge has spent time as counsel, the public can have greater confidence that they’ve earned their place, that they’ve been tested in the real world, and that they’re truly ready to take on the immense responsibility of judging others.

So, the difference, in essence, is between a judge who is merely knowledgeable and one who is wise—between someone who knows the law and someone who understands it, deeply, in the context of human experience. And that, I would argue, is no small difference at all.

I appreciate the question, and it’s one worth addressing. My concerns arise from a deep-seated belief in the importance of experience, tradition, and the proper functioning of our judiciary.

Firstly, there is the matter of courtroom experience. Judges are not mere legal scholars—they are the arbiters of justice, tasked with interpreting and applying the law in real-world scenarios. The courtroom is a place where theory meets practice, where the abstract becomes tangible. It’s here that one truly grasps the complexities and subtleties of the law. When we appoint individuals directly from law firms to the bench, we risk placing them in a position of immense responsibility without ensuring they have the practical experience necessary to wield it effectively.

Then there is the issue of transitioning from advocacy to adjudication. A judge is not an advocate for a particular client or cause but a neutral arbiter who must weigh all sides impartially. This is not a mindset one simply adopts overnight; it requires time, reflection, and a shift in perspective—something that a period as senior counsel can facilitate. Without this, we risk placing individuals on the bench who are still, in a sense, advocates in their hearts, which is not what the role demands.

And let us not overlook the matter of public perception. The judiciary must not only be impartial but be seen to be impartial. When we pluck individuals directly from the corridors of corporate law and place them on the bench, the public might reasonably question whether they can truly leave their past affiliations behind. A stint as senior counsel serves as a necessary buffer, helping to reassure both the individual and the public of their impartiality.

Finally, there is the matter of tradition. There is a reason why the pathway to the bench has, for so long, passed through the ranks of advocacy and senior counsel practice. It is a time-tested route that has consistently produced judges who are not only knowledgeable but also deeply connected to the realities of the law as it is lived and breathed in the courts. To bypass this process is to risk undermining the very foundations of our judiciary, something that should not be done lightly.

In essence, my concern is that this new trend might lead to a judiciary that is less prepared, less impartial, and ultimately less respected. And that, I believe, would be a loss for us all.

Seen in my T2 law school unless you get a star performance in a well known moot, it just ends up as a line on your CV, which it happens with most of people.

The odds may be in your favour and it may be a good experience once, but I suggest focus on GPA, quality internships and networking. That is what gets most people T1 jobs.

All of the best, hope you get whatever you want :)

Going by pure success rate and without any politics:

Shyam Divan

Mukul Rohatgi

Gopal Shankarnarayan

These guys get good orders from virtually any bench in Court.

Sid Dave also in criminal matters.

If you add politics and prominence,

AM Singhvi

Kapil Sibal

See the Judgement of AP High Court in case of Govt. of AP Vs. N. Rami Reddy and ors reported in AIR 2001 AP 226 and Judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Indira Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain AIR 1975 SC 1590. There is distinction between Suspension and Stay of Judgement according to Hon'ble Andra Pradesh High Court Judgement cited supra. Suspension of Judgement revived the position existing before the judgement which is not correct to say when Judgement is only stayed. Refer para 11 to 14 of Judgement of Hon'ble Andra Pradesh High Court cited supra.

SAM lost AM to Trilegal.

AM is a match for Nisha at least in Merger Control. Big name in competition field.

SAM Competition Team is led by NC. AM would have never been made practice head, no matter how much she'd have tried.

Now, she'll become national head of Trilegal.